Delivery and Assessment of an Academic Listening

course: Applying the Four Strands of

Effective Learning Tatiana Galetcaia

B.A., M.A., M.Ed., Ph.D. (pend.) tgaletcaia@gmail.com

To talk about balance, it’s easier to talk about what’s out of balance… Ricky Williams

Presentation preview

Introduction to the concept of the four strands

Small group discussion Large group discussion Questions/Closing remarks

The two key concepts of the effective course

Balance Validity

The four strands framework

• Fluent use of language patterns

• Attention to forms

• Conveying ideas and messages

• Incoming ideas and messages

Meaning-focused

input

Meaning-focused output

Fluency development

Language features

The four strands framework meaning-focused input (listening and

reading—focus on the incoming messages)

meaning-focused output (speaking and writing—focus on conveying messages to another person)

attention to language forms developing fluent use of language items

(Nation & Newton, 2009)

Issues and tendencies

The framework of the four strands in language learning : A tool to design a more balanced program

Two common extremes observed across the board: Communicative and formal language-focused learning

An educational dilemma : Building up knowledge or developing language skills?

Main premises A common–sense rule—the more time you

spend on doing something the better you are likely to be at doing it

The time-on-task principle Those who read a lot are better readers Will those who listen a lot become better

listeners? (Yes? No?)

Listening models

The traditional model of listening : Students are viewed as a mirror that reflects the speaker’s ideas and messages

This view reflects a belief that listening is a passive process

The recent model views listening as a process of active constructing of the meaning (Lynch & Mendelson, 2002).

Main principles of use: Meaning—focused input

Can work only if : —most of learners are listening to what is

familiar to them —the learners are interested in the input and

want to understand it —only a small proportion of features are

unknown ( e.g. up to 95% of vocabulary—should be within previous knowledge) (Hu & Nation, 2000)

—there are large quantities of the input

Meaning-focused output The opportunities to produce language in listening class

should not be limited to tests (and quizzes based on just catching the correct word or number).

The main learning goal is not to mechanistically

reproduce what has been said in the lecture but to PRODUCE language by conveying the message based on lecture contents

“CanTest fallacy” should be avoided—aptitude and achievement tests should not replace one another

Writing and speaking need to be used in listening class as widely as receptive skills

Focus on language

Requires spaced, conscientious, repeated attention to language features

Learners are engaged in deep processing of the language forms pertaining to the content

Forms—simple, within the acquired level of knowledge and within the subject specific topic of the listening material

Fluency Can be achieved only if the language

features are familiar

There is a demand of producing the language closer to the native speech (faster, clearer, appropriate intonation, etc.)

There is a large amount of input and output

Balancing and integrating the four strands

Roughly given the same amount of time (25% of the course time for each)

Despite giving equal time to each strand can slightly change over the course or a program the recommendation is to keep them equally represented

The productive skills in the language classes should not center around fluency development and language forms but the meaning-focused input as well

The receptive language skills classes should focus not only on input and language forms but also on fluency development

Assessment

Purposes of testing: Main dilemma: reporting on learner’s status ( ranking) vs. the purposes of learning

Questions of reliability and validity A “washback” effect

Reliability Reliability is a measure of a degree to which

the same assessment procedure is likely to give consistent results (Rost, 1990).(On different days by different people—the same score)

Error of measurement—has to be minimized (test results’ variation should not represent differences

among measurement criteria or the examiners but the differences among the test-takers and their listening proficiency)

The various test content and test administration have to be restricted (E.g. test questions are clearly defined to reduce possibilities for multivariance of responses)

Validity Face validity How fair is the test from the point of view of the test user Content and cognitive validity Considering whether the content of the test reflects the

content of the skill, language or course (Nation & Newton, 2009; Rost, 1990).

Construct validity The degree of the test to distinguish effectively those

who have gained the targeted skills from those who have not. (Rost, 1990).

Sources of listening difficulty: Washback effect

A term introduced by Morrow (1985) Refers to formal testing biased towards

attributions of listening outcomes to language proficiency rather than building reasonable interpretations (Rost, 1990)

I.e. poor test performance is attributed to a lack of

linguistic knowledge rather than procedural and pragmatic sources (Brown, 1986) (e.g. poor quality of the tape, low volume of speakers , unclear test instructions, etc.)

Learning goals Language items pronunciation vocabulary grammar

Ideas content Skills l s, r, w, fluency accuracy

Text discourse patterns and rules (Nation & Newton, 2009, p. 15)

References Brown, G. (1986). Investigating listening comprehension in context., Applied Linguistics, 3, 284-302. Gotlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand Oaks:, CA: Corwin Press. Hu, M., & Nation, I.S.P., (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language13 (1), 403-430. Lynch, T., & Mendelson, (2002). Listening . In Schmitt (Ed.). An Introduction to applied linguistics (pp. 193-210). London: Arnold. Nation, I.S. P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York: Rutledge. Richards, J. C. (2012). Curriculum development in language teaching. New York: Cambridge Language Education. Rost, M. (1990). Listening in language learning. New York: Longman.